Does it have to download the entire package? It doesn't seem like that great of a change from 3.1.1a, which I downloaded a few days ago (I'm on dialup, so I care not to get 3.1.2). I guess I could patch it manually but ... nah.

I'm not so sure about that. I have had it block HSBC bank's popup, although that appears to be fixed. I'd prefer if it was configurable to some degree (like allow all popups from so and so). I like the cookie manager system better than the current popup manager.

I must agree on the popup javascript thing, I would much prefer an interface like the cookie
manager (ie you can get a dialog where you allow it or not, just for this session or put it on a popup block list).http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30116 seems to be a wishlist for something like it...
Also the http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58650 seem to indicate that the
deny list for javascript *not just popups* might be out of whack...
Note that I think the whole javascript section should be reworked at least I havent got
it to work as I would expect. I really prefer the Mozilla Browser ie Mozilla Firebird 0.6
way of doing.

And I'd really like to see a similar mechanism for nspluginviewer. Especially Flash is a resource hog like nothing else out there, sometimes you need it but most you don't it would be really cool if you could disable it

I have a script which does that -*cough* killall nspluginviewer *cough*- in the panel but it's hardly elegant

I had only looked at freshmeat because I thought most programs were listed there. At apps.kde most crypto apps seemed abandoned since KDE 2, but I found kgpg that works great. This one should be included in the distribution IMHO.

I've recently installed the SuSE 8.2 distribution featuring KDE 3.1.1. Of course I had need to access the menu editor to get everything laid out the way I would like. It has crashed probably a minimum of twice every time I've brought it up. Maybe I should open up the code and take a look? It doesn't strike me that this should be that elaborate a piece of code. Pretty much as complex as a bookmark editor in a browser and there are plenty of those that work. Any chance any work is planned for this elemental piece of interface configuration software or am I using the wrong utility? It is the only option I get when right clicking the "Start Applications" button on the task bar.

Couple other things. It would be nice when looking at the "About" box in an application if, besides the pronounceable name of the application, the actual executable command was given. Is the menu editor kmedit, kmenuedit, kmenueditor or what? Just an example and probably not the hardest to figure out, but it is nice to know the name of the file you are executing. This comment is certainly not restricted to KDE applications.

Finally, it would be nice on the download page to see a text file describing what is necessary to download when. I'm using a dial-up and even though I eventually want to get all of the new KDE, I'll probably only pull a few pieces at a time. Since I want my system to keep working as well as to utilize the new pieces, it would be nice to get everything I need for a working feature in one connection. (If such a file is already there, I apologize.)

Perhaps there was a problem with the packaging. I've never had a problem with the Menu Editor (KDE 3.1.2 on Debian 3.0 here), and my menus have the app name and generic name, e.g.

KCron (Task Scheduler)
Cervisia (CVS Frontend)
Kate (Text Editor)

etc etc.

I was never happy with RPM-based distros, perhaps it's time you took Debian for a spin. Check out Knoppix (www.knoppix.org), it's a bootable live CD with KDE based on Debian. Don't use it myself, but I've heard good things about it.

Perhaps there is something wrong with my compiled copy then. I use Gentoo (flags: -march=pentium3 -O3) and I have seen kmenuedit crash on me many times, particularly when using drag n-drop for an entry without an icon. I say so about kde 3.1.1 .

That is a very accurate description of the most frequent crash experience I have encountered with the menu editor. I'm not absolutely certain it occurs only when there is no icon associated, but I know that has been the case in some of the crashes.

The other thing is that moving menu items or deleting them doesn't seem to actually delete them from the original location, only hide them. This can cause problems and certainly must waste resources.

I don't think it can change the default locations of items in the menu when run non-priviledged (as it usually is). Most program locations are common for all and can probably be manipulated directly only by root (playing around in /usr/kde/3.1/share/applnk , I suppose). So the menu editor doesn't delete them, it overrides (hides) them somehow for the non-priviledged user.

For having a nice installer which deinstalls XFree4 'cause you wanted a prog with a far dependency to XFree3.3.6? No, thanks. I prefer to have control on what's going on - apt-get-trouble is too much windows-like in its behavior.

It fixes a lot fo the bugs that annoy me the most, likee the tab delay for websites that can't be found. Very nice enchancement release, I can't wait for 3.2 when the UI usability will really be improved like GNOME 2.4's ;) I don't mean you have to eliminate any options, just group them mor elogically, currently the context menus in Konqueror for example are a mess, always giving me options I can't use or would not have any need to use in it and many of the options in the control center can be grouped ebtter. I do at the same time think that many of its options are not needed and should be hidden in an advanced mode.

> currently the context menus in Konqueror for example are a mess, always giving me options I can't use or would not have any need to use in it

By default, there are about 5 options in Konqueror's context menus in CVS... this is pretty good.

HOWEVER, if you install anything past kdebase, you get applications installing a bunch of service menu entries into Konqueror. This is where you start getting 15 menu-long context menus in konqueror. IMHO, an "actions" submenu would be quite logical.

> I can't wait for 3.2 when the UI usability will really be improved like GNOME 2.4's ;)

You should really go back and take a look at KDE 2.0. I recently booted up my celeron-300a for the first time in ages (running slackware 7.0 with KDE 2.0.1.) Well, I was pleasently suprised with the usability of KDE back then. Things generally *felt* a lot less cluttered, perhaps because there were less features. It actually felt somewhat like GNOME 2.2 does. Perhaps in terms of usability/features GNOME 3.x will be like KDE 3.x/GNOME 1.x, and KDE 4.x will be like KDE 2.x and GNOME 2.x :)

Usability for the average computer user
Usability for the brand new (or inexperienced) computer users

The people in the first group are basically your average computer user. They, of course, use MS-Windows(tm), as it has >90% market share. They are comfortable with Windows and know how to get things done with it.

The people in the second group will, upon, seeing a Windows desktop, perhaps be daunted by it. This to a point in which they have to call tech support, etc...

Currently, I think the people in group 1 (most people who are trying out Linux and other major operating systems in which KDE/GNOME runs), will probably be most comfortable with KDE. There are just some paradigms in KDE that are closer to Windows than GNOME is to Windows (Konqueror/Windows Explorer/IE are quite similiar, and for MANY users, would be their most used application.)

Currently, I think that the people in group 2 will be most happy with gnome2. In most instances, it is just simplier than KDE is. If KDE had something like a kids, and/or an easy mode, it would satisfy these users.

The third group, and not mentioned thus far, however, is the power user. This is the average user of Linux or most non-Windows/Mac operating systems. For power users, raw features, and configurability win, and so does KDE. I think the single biggest thing in terms of usability for power users is the ability to morph the underlying system to how the user works. I think KDE, with a myriad of options, therefore, offers the best usability for power users.

> Currently, I think that the people in group 2 will be most happy
> with gnome2. In most instances, it is just simplier than KDE is.
> If KDE had something like a kids, and/or an easy mode, it would

Me runs for cover. Easy / meduim /advanced mode no no no no ;-) As it seems, this is a bad route to take. Remember Nautilus (ok, it's kde people here but anyway)? It turned out that most, if not all, users switched to advanced mode and it was scraped. Sensable defaults, good and logical grouping options with clear names that explaines what they do feels a whole lot sensable to me. But that's just me :)

I agree... having seperate user level modes is not the way to go. An environment that is tailored for striking a balance between the three is much better. I was not trying to advocate user modes in either case (although it may seem that I was :))

>> I think KDE, with a myriad of options, therefore, offers the best usability for power users.

The current crowded mess of options in all kinds of weird, horizontally stretched and covering a large part of the screen, visually unpleasant looking dialogs (which cannot be themed away with nice themes and icons) that can only be found by spending more than half an hour of expensive time is not what I call for 'power' users and is definitely no good for usability.

(that's one reason why I'm switching on and off between KDE and GNOME, the latter has a way better HIG - is that OpenHCI effort still alive btw? the mailing lists seem to be dead.. :/ )